Posted on 02/24/2018 2:37:40 PM PST by Hojczyk
By letter to Susan Rice dated February 8, 2018, Senators Grassley and Graham posed 12 numbered questions. I posted the Graham/Grassley letter in “Rice papers the file.” By letter dated February 23, 2018, attorney Kathryn Ruemmler has now responded to the Grassley Graham letter. I posted Ruemmler’s letter nearby this morning in “Susan Rice responds, sort of.”
Let’s take an inventory. I have italicized my accounting below, subject to further thought and analysis:
Question 1. Did you send the email attached to this letter to yourself? Do you have any reason to dispute the timestamp of the email?
Answered.
Question 2. When did you first become aware of the FBI’s investigation into allegations of collusion between Mr. Trump’s associates and Russia?
Not answered.
Question 3. When did you become aware of any surveillance activities, including FISA applications, undertaken by the FBI in conducting that investigation? At the time you wrote this email to yourself, were you aware of either the October 2016 FISA application for surveillance of Carter Page or the January 2017 renewal?
Partially answered.
Question 4. Did anyone instruct, request, suggest, or imply that you should send yourself the aforementioned Inauguration Day email memorializing President Obama’s meeting with Mr. Comey about the Trump/Russia investigation? If so, who and why?
Partially answered.
Question 5. Is the account of the January 5, 2017 meeting presented in your email accurate? Did you omit any other portions of the conversation?
Not answered.
Question 6. Other than that email, did you document the January 5, 2017 meeting in any way, such as contemporaneous notes or a formal memo? To the best of your knowledge, did anyone else at that meeting take notes or otherwise memorialize the meeting?
Not answered.
Question 7. During the meeting, did Mr. Comey or Ms. Yates mention potential press coverage of the Steele dossier? If so, what did they say?
Answered narrowly (“In the conversation Ambassador Rice documented, there was no discussion of Christopher Steele or the Steele dossier, contrary to the suggestion in your letter”).
Question 8. During the meeting, did Mr. Comey describe the status of the FBI’s relationship with Mr. Steele, or the basis for that status?
Answered narrowly (see above).
Question 9. When and how did you first become-aware of the allegations made by Christopher Steele?
Not answered.
Question 10. When and how did you first become aware that the Clinton Campaign and the Democratic National Committee funded Mr. Steele’s efforts?
Not answered.
Question 11. You wrote that President Obama stressed that he was not asking about, initiating or instructing anything from a law enforcement perspective. Did President Obama ask about, initiate, or instruct anything from any other perspective relating to the FBI’ s investigation?
Not answered.
Question 12. Did President Obama have any other meetings with Mr. Corney, Ms. Yates, or other government officials about the FBI’ s investigation of allegations of collusion between Trump associates and Russia? If so, when did these occur, who participated, and what was discussed?
Not answered.
Susan Rice has lawyered up. For some reason or other, with respect to several pointed and important questions, she is resting on her right to remain silent.
Edit: Susan Rice, not Collins.
The corruption of the Obama Administration is astounding!
It is the story of the snake.
No riddle.
Bttt.
5.56mm
She looks like the Jokers sidekick in a Batman movie.
I think you mean Samantha Power, native of Ireland, who was UN Ambassador. Married to Cass Sunstein
I used to respect probably all of the government’s institutions.
It took a long time, but today I can’t think of one that the rats haven’t soiled. The natural admiration that I previously had is gone. ‘Eff ‘em all.
Me, too.
It ironic ... the Left wanted to tear down the respect we had for our institutions in order to build themselves up to replace them. But, now that they need to use those institutions for their own ends, nobody believes in them.
Gosh that’s well said. So true.
Obama and his circle of self-convinced ‘believers’ truly think that what they do is justified. Even if illegal, deceitful, opposed to the Constitution, or if it destroys those they disagree with. Most of them have a limited world view that was marinated at specific universities and graduate schools (mostly law schools), and simmered within the echo chamber of liberal politics. They are the ‘convinced’, and are sadly way too limited by their ego and passions to see beyond themselves. Corruption, to them, is just methodology to achieve what they believe are ‘justifiable and necessary’ ends. This makes them very, very dangerous, and very similar to every previous group of totalitarian ‘leaders’.
I agree. Very well said, and very accurate.
That photo has been seriously distorted
I should know that by now.
A short but most excellent post. It explains the total perfidy of the far left. They know they are in violation of the law and constitution. In their minds it is for the greater good and not only right but moral and noble. Hitler, Lennin, Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot had the same philosophy. That philosophy put about 150 million in their graves. Yes, the left in our nation would do the same.
Proudly serving as official liar for the Obama administration since Benghazi and accepting promotions for her work.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.